BRITISH DEMOCRACY: NO TIME FOR COMPLACENCY

After the general election, in the House of Commons, the former and present Prime Minister laughed together and said nice things about each other.  This occasioned a note of self-congratulation in the media about the state of British democracy. Peaceful change of government.  No-one disputing the vote count.  A gold medal for GB in electoral conduct. 
 
Well, up to a point Lord Copper.  There is evidence of what seemed organised intimidation during campaigning: death threats requiring police protection, canvassers photographed while talking to voters, masked men disrupting a community meeting, fake Labour Party leaflets, yelling and vitriolic abuse directed at Labour candidates.  All serious enough for the Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, to call relevant ministers and civil servants together to discuss what might be done. 

The grievance behind such worrying levels of intimidation is, of course, Gaza and the Labour Leader’s initial response to what became horrifying civilian casualties.  It all began just four days after Hamas’ massacres inside Israel.   Sir Keir Starmer was interviewed by Nick Ferrari on LBC just after the Labour Party conference ended.  Asked about ‘proportionate response’, whether a siege, “cutting off power and water” was appropriate, Starmer, endorsing Israel’s “right to defend herself”, replied that it did “have that right, it’s an ongoing situation, obviously everything must be within international law”.
  
A siege of enemy forces is not prohibited by international humanitarian law but besieging civilian populations is. Starmer’s words had conflated his insistence on the right to defence and his answer to the illegal besieging of a civilian population.  It was a costly mistake. 

Refusing to call for a ceasefire made things worse.  Starmer, expecting to become Prime Minister and determined to gain credibility in the international arena, chose not to break step with the USA which opposed an immediate ceasefire until destruction and death of civilians in Gaza became intolerable.  His stance compounded anger, discomfort and criticism inside and outside the Labour Party and highlighted the growing gap between politicians and the public.  The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby responding to the King’s Speech in the House of Lords acknowledged these divisions.  “Interfaith dialogue in this country has almost collapsed since October 7 last year and tensions are high and that is entirely as a result of overseas matters.  That is seen with Israel and Gaza.  Conflict overseas has a profound impact on our own society and our own domestic policies, because of the multicultural nature of our communities”. 

Systematic electoral punishment of the Labour Party, in the opinion of many for taking the Muslim vote “for granted”, needed organisation.  TMV, The Muslim Vote, is a collective of Muslim organisations, led by Anas Altikriti - himself a contentious figure - which supported some 30 candidates, including 9 Independents, 9 from Galloway’s Workers’ Party, but also Greens, Lib Dems and Scottish and Welsh Nationalists standing against a Labour candidate. Several of the groups in the TMV network are mistrusted by government.  Four pro-Gaza candidates supported by TMV were elected, wiping out thumping Labour majorities, several others came close to winning, in seats like Bethnal Green and Bow, Birmingham Ladywood, and Ilford North.
 
Some polling shows that in constituencies with over 30% Muslim population the share of Labour votes had dropped since 2019 from 65% to 36%.  TMV was certainly not the only reason Labour lost key seats such as that of the Shadow Paymaster General Jonathan Ashworth’s Leicester South.  Muslims who like other British voters were concerned about the NHS, housing, cost of living and, also, like other less affluent voters, felt neglected.  Part of the general malaise with politics. Gaza energised voting particularly amongst Muslims.
 
But it is difficult to deny that the Israeli Defence Forces’ (IDF) Gaza massacres and destruction in response to civilian slaughter of October 7 was so profoundly shocking – not only for Muslims – that it became the passionate focus of single-issue voting this July.   And undeniable that the characterisation of the Arab-Jewish conflict in the Middle East as religious is still hardening Palestinian and Israeli positions, exported into a British election encouraging intimidation and bullying.  Fury directed at Muslim women candidates who remained loyal to the Labour leadership revealed a misogyny we have come to know in Afghanistan that should by now be in the dustbin of history. 

Gaza has become a religious dispute to the degree that Hamas and the right-wing religious fanatics in the Knesset have forced it into this mould.   At the heart of the conflict lies rival nationalisms and a battle for control of territory.  To be Palestinian is not identical with being a Muslim nor ever has been.  There are Christian and secular Palestinians.  Christians were amongst some of the earliest Palestinian nationalist leaders.    There are also plenty of Jews in Israel and around the world appalled by what the IDF is doing in Gaza.  The TMV’s approach amongst Muslims reinforced the perception that protest about Gaza was a religious single-issue. 

Christians are not immune to the lure of sectarianism and single-issue voting as the ‘troubles’ in Northern Ireland showed, and the issue of abortion in the USA is now showing.  The United States Catholic Bishops’ Conference in 2019 gave an example that seems to me excellent counsel to voters of all faiths.  “As Catholics, we are not single-issue voters.  A candidate’s position on a single issue is not sufficient to guarantee a voter’s support”.  In the past, the Catholic Bishops of England and Wales have said much the same. 

The events after the horrifying murders and stabbings of young girls in Southport have put the intimidation of electoral candidates into a wider perspective.  Violent and planned public disorder in Hartlepool, Westminster, Manchester, Aldershot and Sunderland, as well as Southport, has revealed a major national issue.  Re-emergent EDL, English Defence League, followers plus other small extremist groups, and their incitement of anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant hatred, adds to the Home Secretary’s in-box and that of the Prime Minister.   There is more to come.  It is striking a chord amongst certain – male- sections of the population.
 
EDL-type thuggery and disinformation in social media - needing decisive government intervention - are yesterday’s, today’s and tomorrow’s problem.  As far as British democracy is concerned, sadly, everything in the garden isn’t lovely.
 

See TheArticle 03/08/2024